Invited to a 1999 debate on the republic referendum at an inner city branch of the Liberal Party of Australia, my assertion that constitutional monarchies or crowned republics were among the world’s most advanced countries was greeted with derision and ridicule.

It was difficult to believe this was a branch of the party founded by Sir Robert Menzies. Saying " Well may you laugh," I then recited a list of countries with admirable records, all constitutional monarchies. this was greeted in resentful silence.

The fact is that of the seven oldest continuing democracies, five are constitutional monarchies. Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II reigns over four.

The Westminster system has been exported to many countries and has had an unrivalled success, unlike the constitutional models of the to two oldest ( politicians') republics, the USA and Switzerland.

For many years now, ACM has been posting evidence on this site supporting our argument that constitutional monarchy (or as many say a "Crowned Republic") offers the world’s most consistently successful form of government.

This is principally in the United Nations’ annual Human Development Index and in certain other indices. By ranking countries in a way which is more consistent with this thinking, the HDR report has helped shift the debate away from gross domestic product (GDP) per capita as the only measure of development.

Instead, the HDI has provided a summary of each country’s achievement in attaining for its people:

· A long and healthy life,

· access to knowledge, and

· a decent standard of living.

A common theme emerges in all of these indices. While constitutional monarchies make up only about 15% of the nations of the world, they are very much over represented among the best performing countrie sin the world. Recent academic research indicates the most important factors in a nation becoming and remaining democratic, prosperous and well educated is its institutions. This surely means that the institutions in a constitutional democracy seem to be particularly appropriate for a nation to become democratic, prosperous, well educated. It is more than a coincidence.

ACM has long argued that on any well known measure of the best places to live in, constitutional monarchies ( or crowned republics) are always clustered towards the top. The recent report on the best countries for mothers to live in was just one more piece of compelling evidence.

Now a republican – courageously publishing under the pseudonym "Publius" – claims, on a republican site owned by and managed by the ARM’s media director, that I have “merely cherry-picked statistics in which monarchies appear to outperform republics”.

He then refers to a number of indices where he suggests monarchies do not do so well.

Well, let’s look at these, ignoring lists giving no more than a purely subjective judgement, for example, coffee table indices about the most livable cities.

On each I shall refer to two statistics.

The first is the the number of constitutional monarchies in the best ten countries. If there are more than 1.5, then constitutional monarchies are over represented. That is there are more of them than there should be.

The second statistic is the number of constitutional monarchies out of the best 20. If there are more than three, constitutional monarchies are again over represented.

And if constitutional monarchies are over represented, republics ( that is politicians' republics) are therefore under represented. With the other historical evidence which I mention briefly below, the case for retaining constitutional monarchies is overwhelming.

...indices chosen by republican "Publius"...

Remember , if the numbers are above 1.5 out of the ten best performing countries and 3 out of the twenty respectively, constitutional monarchies are outperforming republics. This is because constiutional monarchies make up around 15% of the countries in the world.

The twentieth century decline in the number of constitutional monarchies coincided wth the decline of liberal democracy and the rise of fascism, communism and authoritarian government.

The latest indices which readily reveal the best twenty performing countries, and the conclusion on each follow:

ACM was the first in the world to spot a very persuasive statistic: that on any measure of the best places to live in, constitutional monarchies are always clustered towards the top.

The report below is just one more.

We used this in the referendum campaign. You can glance at the report in this new section on the ACM site.

Just click on this icon in the right hand column on our front page.

Mothers in Norway and Australia are living in the best places in the world, according to Save the Children's 11th annual "Mothers' Index", which ranks the best and worst places to be a mother. Only 15% of the world’s countries are constitutional monarchies.

The republican movement will try to explain away the following. They can't.

Constitutional monarchies make up 50% of the top 20best places to be a mother.Constitutional monarchies make up 70% of the top 10best places to be a mother.

Constitutional monarchies make up 80% of the top 5 best places to be a mother.

There is not one constitutional monarchy among the 20 worst places to be a mother.They are all republics.

Visitors may access this through this icon in the right hand column of the front page of the site.

Athough a young country, Australia is one of the seven oldest continuing democracies in the world.

Of these five are constitutional monarchies, four of which have Queen Elizabeth II as their sovereign.

This is testimony to the fact that constitutional monarchy under the Westminster system is the only constitutional model which has been imported by other countries and which has operated successfully for any extended period of time.

This in itself should cause Australian republicans to at least attempt to devise and reveal a constitutional model which they honestly believe will be as successful.

But since the Australian people clearly rejected what the republicans believed was their best model in 1999, they have refused for over a decade to indicate what they want.

Instead they want the taxpayer once again to do what they are clearly unable to do: work out what they want

...a new constitution...

Long ago the Challis Professor of International Law at the University of Sydney, the late Professor PH Lane - one of Australia's greatest constitutional lawyers -argued that it would be an error for republicans to try to graft a republic on to what is essentially a monarchical constitution.

Instead, they should develop a new Constitution.

Assuming the republican movement were willing to do this, and abandon their demand that the taxpayers fund this, what model could they choose?

Instead the republican movement through its media director and his associates spends a vast amount of time telling ACM that they should remove me and our executive director from our roles.

ACM is not at all concerned with who is running the republican movement. We never have. But along with other taxpayers we are concerned that the vast sums paid by Australian taxpayers to fund their search for an elusive constitutional model stop now.

...oldest republics....

The first clue to the republican movement is surely the blindingly evident fact that the two oldest continuing democracies are Switzerland and the United States, especially if you ignore their civil wars and the existence of slavery for so long in the United States.

...Switzerland...

The Swiss Constitution is so idiosyncratic it could not possibly be copied in other countries. But aspects of the Swiss system can be.

Indeed, our founding fathers took the referendum from Switzerland but ensured that only federal politicians and not the people could initiate it.

Even in this form it has rightly ensured that only those constitutional changes the people of Australia have judged “desirable irresistible and inevitable” have been adopted.

...United States...

[ The President and Mrs. Kennedy ]

Now the American Constitution has its attractions. While it is very much a politicians’ republic, it is at least one one with effective checks and balances, unlike the two highly flawed models proposed by the republican movement at the 1998 Constitutional Convention.

It is stable but it suffers from rigidities not present in the Westminster system.

...impeachment paralyses the government and congress..

The President is extremely difficult to remove and doesn't go when he assured. The case concerning President Nixon is the best-known example.

Think of how quickly a Prime Minister or Premier can go under our system.

Crowned republics, constitutional monarchies, have once again outperformed politicians’ republics. They invariably do so on any measure of well being.

Whenever I made this point in 1998 and 1999 during the referendum campaign, it was greeted with howls of derision by the supporters of the republican movement.

But I had the evidence.

[ They are also among the least corrupt: 2006 corruption index]

Although ignored by the media in the 1998 and 1999 campaigns, it was very much a newsworthy fact that crowned republics outperform politicians’ republics on most measures of well being, including freedom, education, health, life expectancy, wealth, the distribution of wealth and low levels of corruption.

This is still newsworthy.

[Your Majesty, I have to report that New Zealand and three of Your Majesty's Other Realms are in the top tweny in the Legatum Prosperity Index.]

Crowned republics, constitutional monarchies, make up only fifteen percent of all countries. Yet they are over represented among the world’s most prosperous countries, and in every aspect.

The Legatum Prosperity Index is a global assessment of wealth and wellbeing. Its founders say that unlike other studies that rank countries by actual levels of wealth, life satisfaction or development, the Legatum Prosperity Index produces rankings based upon the very foundations of prosperity - those factors that will help drive economic growth and produce happy citizens over the long term.

The index is composed of eight sub indices: the economy, entrepreneurship, governance, health, safety and security, personal freedom and social capital.

It seems that however you measure them, and however you weigh them, constitutional monarchies - crowned republics- outperform every other constitutional model.

We have been pointing this out since the inception of this column, indeed since the campaign in the nineties.

When I was invited to a debate on this at an inner city branch of a major party, and I stated this proposition,the republicans did not wait for the evidence. Instead was greeted with derision, with very loud guffaws.

I then began to produce the evidence. This was received in silence. I don’t think it changed the minds of those who had already decided that the Crown had to go, hoever divisive this was and whatever the cost.

...Sir Robert...

During the referendum campaign, one prominent politician, Senator Amanda Vanstone, even argued that Sir Robert Gordon Menzies would have come out as a republican.

I have no doubt that Sir Robert remains a monarchist. And as a good Presbyterian, he would not break the Third Commandment.ed and remains